Social security cuts

How much will they cut my check ? 66 yrs old on full retirement

 

What makes you think they will?

 

National Enquirer..

 

I'm not looking for a big raise, or maybe no raise.

Why should I expect a raise every year? I shouldn't.

 

At 56 years old, not news I wish to read....While I think that it would be better to overhaul the system, giving younger people an option to back out of this ponzy scheme, they must do something for those of us who are either on it now, or getting close to collecting what we have spent a lifetime contributing to....

 

They just cut all Federal Employees raise for next year. Trump is testing the waters. If the pubs do well in November expect that your SS may be GONE next year.

Can you eat your hatred of Mexicans?

 

FDR promised it would be just like a bank account with your name on it.

 

Progressives lie....Shocking.

 

Third rail. Could be no raise or small raise. No way on a cut.

 

Only with pico de gallo.

 

Trump can expect more office supply theft for cutting a COLA..

 

All they have to do is raise taxes on the Billionaires slightly and that will save it for everyone, so if the pubs remain in power you may confidently expect to be living under a bridge so the Koch's can spend more money to take away your healthcare too.

 

You should in a way because of monetary inflation. Small cost of living raises; in my opinion, are more common than they are rare. Especially if you are not in a minimum wage heavy business that is hourly. Some higher paid and more skilled workers on salary might not be expected to see one, as some of those jobs will "top out" at a high income.

 

Please disregard this message from Chicken Little.

 

One of the least informed comments made here in the last week and that is saying something. Please present the "plan" to eliminate SS for those who have paid in.

 

IMO any party suggesting reducing Social Security benefits for existing recipients or failing to increase them in line with inflation is committing political suicide. Senior citizens are very likely to vote and would punish a party severely if their benefits are reduced.

It is possible that the entitlement rules for future recipients may be changed with the retirement age being raised and/or a larger number of years contributions being required to qualify for social security or for a particular level of social security.

This is what is happening in the UK. The retirement age is being increased gradually, a small increase in the retirement age can result in a large reduction in the overall cost.

 

Oh, it's not out yet, and the pubs will vehemently deny it's there, which means that if a pub House remains we should expect it on Jan 4.

Again, do you think Trump is cutting Federal Employees pay for nothing? He know he can get away with this and he can also gauge how much he can cut SS by.

Very few of the pubs will actually say so but it's very clear they've had their eyes on your SS for a long time.Keep in mind that these are the people whose FIRST order of business was to take away your healthcare. Not Repeal and Replace, they had NOTHING to replace Obamacare with, and they STILL don't

 

This looks a lot like one of those 'click-bait' threads, and, it's total BULLSHIT.

Nobody is going to CUT Social Security! The two prominent Republicans who even suggested this with any degree of seriousness, "Crusader Rick" Santorum, and Governor "Buttertub" Christie, have been cast into the political "outer-darkness". Christie especially, spent several months begging for a job in the Trump Administration -- and you can see what THAT effort got him....

Think: the Baby-Boomers who are collecting SS now (or will be soon) number well over 75,000,000. These are, obviously, VOTING-AGE people, and Boomers are famous for voting every chance they get! It would be total political suicide for any political party to call for screwing these people for ANY reason -- especially after they've been forced to pay into this RETIREMENT SYSTEM all of their working lives.

I would challenge any poster here to provide evidence and proof that anybody of national prominence besides Santorum or Christie has made any serious suggestion in the last twenty years that this EARNED entitlement should be cut!

 

Obama suffered this. He was going to change how they calculate payments using a CPI (Consumer Price Index) that would have curtailed gov't spending and reduced the rate of benefit increases. Under the chained CPI the average beneficiary who just started receiving benefits would receive a yearly benefit $653 lower after 10 years. The backlash was pretty severe and so it was eventually dropped.

Obama tried this in 2012 when he didn't have to worry about being re-elected.

As far as Social Security goes, no President is going to reduce payments and benefits. It would be political suicide and it always has to be attempted during a 2nd term, because, someone will always lose when it comes to reform. But it needs reform. If Trump gets a 2nd term, expect it to be a hot issue. If not, that can gets kicked down the road until we get a President serving his 2nd term in office.

 

I wouldn't be so sure. GWB in 2005 attempted a push for partial privatization of SS, but failed. If the GOP holds on to congress in the Fall, I would not be surprised if this idea would make a comeback.

The problem is, if you want to balance the budget, and it is likely that the fiscal hawks of the GOP come out of the woodworks again after the Fall election, you HAVE to cut "entitlements". There is not enough money to cut in discretionary spending to balance the budget.

 

As the responses in another thread have shown, decreasing the pay of public employees is a popular move for everyone who is not a public employee, the dependant of a public employee or a significant other of a public employee. Furthermore public employees tend to lean Democrat so a GOP politician doing it isn't risking that much support from those affected.

OTOH, senior citizens lean Republican, are very likely to vote and enjoy quite a lot of support from the public at large.

 

Hm. I've been saying this for 25 years...

 

Get back to us when it is "out"

 

The Social Security trust-fund has enough money to operate with no problems for quite a while. As it is, SS will continue to generate more money than it spends through 2021. As it stands right now, SS has all the money it needs until the year 2034.

What everyone forgets is that the biggest 'bubble' in the numbers of recipients, Baby-Boomers, are DYING LIKE FLIES every day. Yes, more and more of them are reaching retirement age, but all those years spent getting wrecked livers, sexually-transmitted diseases, cancer, heart diseases, and all three kinds of hepatitis are rapidly depleting their numbers. Check the Obituary columns every day and see who's dying!

And when you die, the SS system does not (NOT) continue to pay out money like other kinds of 'investments' do. You die -- you no longer collect. There is no "Estate".... The system simply sucks-up the rest of whatever "you had coming"....

 

It's pleasant out tonight.....Let's leave it out

Really, I hope I'm wrong on this, but I think the pubs will see their chance to get our SS if they win in 2018